Annals of vascular surgery · 2025
Time is Aorta in Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Civilini Efrem, Pascucci Maria Giulia, Jubouri Matti, Bashir Mohamad, D'Oria Mario, Piffaretti Gabriele
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although cardiovascular control optimization through best medical therapy remains the gold standard of treatment for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) according to international guidelines, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has increasingly emerged as a viable and appealing treatment option due to its potential to induce favorable aortic remodeling and improve long-term outcomes. However, the optimal timing of TEVAR in uTBAD remains a subject of debate. This narrative review aims at evaluating safety, efficacy, and outcomes of TEVAR at different time points of the disease history.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed and Scopus, to synthesize research evidence on the timing of TEVAR in uTBAD.
RESULTS: Hyperacute-phase TEVAR (<24 hours) is associated with prohibitive periprocedural risks and is thus discouraged. Acute-phase TEVAR (1-14 days) may provide benefits in aortic remodeling but it is burdened by rather elevated rates of early complications and reinterventions. The subacute phase (14-90 days) is consistently identified as the optimal therapeutic window, balancing procedural safety and efficacy, with studies reporting superior outcomes in terms of mortality, complications, and aortic remodeling. Chronic-phase TEVAR (>90 days), although sometimes necessary in cases of disease progression, is associated with poorer outcomes, including higher rates of reintervention, complications, and limited aortic remodeling with respect to the subacute phase.
CONCLUSION: The consistent findings across the studies analyzed indicate that the subacute phase offers the best combination of reduced procedural risks and favorable long-term outcomes. However, stronger evidence is needed to refine timing strategies.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed and Scopus, to synthesize research evidence on the timing of TEVAR in uTBAD.
RESULTS: Hyperacute-phase TEVAR (<24 hours) is associated with prohibitive periprocedural risks and is thus discouraged. Acute-phase TEVAR (1-14 days) may provide benefits in aortic remodeling but it is burdened by rather elevated rates of early complications and reinterventions. The subacute phase (14-90 days) is consistently identified as the optimal therapeutic window, balancing procedural safety and efficacy, with studies reporting superior outcomes in terms of mortality, complications, and aortic remodeling. Chronic-phase TEVAR (>90 days), although sometimes necessary in cases of disease progression, is associated with poorer outcomes, including higher rates of reintervention, complications, and limited aortic remodeling with respect to the subacute phase.
CONCLUSION: The consistent findings across the studies analyzed indicate that the subacute phase offers the best combination of reduced procedural risks and favorable long-term outcomes. However, stronger evidence is needed to refine timing strategies.